Quote from: Spinachcat;1133001I envy your knack for tossing grenades into discussions!

Do you believe Alignment has been pivotal to D&D's success? If so, please explain.

Yes I do think that things like Alignment and Dungeons have been pivotal to DnD success because they give a new player an instant idea of what they are supposed to do when they play.  You are wearing the White Hat and you are going down to kill and loot the Black Hats.  Why?  Because they are Bad and you are Good.  Does Gamma World have that same simplicity for a new player?

Plus of course DnD is Fantasy which has a much wider audience compared to Gamma Worlds Sci Fi roots.

QuotePersonally, I don't know. Do you feel Alignment has helped the success of Warhammer and Palladium's games?

I enjoy alignment as the shorthand for a PC's core values, but I've enjoyed plenty of RPGs without alignment.

I dont follow Warhammer very closely but to my point of view it just looks a Miniature War Game that ripped off an RPG skin from DnD.

Palladium "Alignments" always seemed like a random grab bag of traits that just seemed arbitrary and non sensical with titles that did not seem to map to anything.  I mean what is the difference between Principled (Good) and Scrupulous (Good)?  Not sure and can not tell from the titles.

QuoteAll depends on the GM.

As a GM, I expect Paladins to be Lawful Good paragons 24/7/365 because YOU - not me, not anybody else, just you - choose to play a Paladin. If I'm running a game with Paladins, they get social advantages beyond other PCs because hot damn, everybody knows you can trust that Paladin. The rest of the adventurers may talk about being good guys, but the Paladin literally glows with divine grace. In exchange for those social bonuses, you must adhere to LG - ESPECIALLY when it sucks to adhere to LG.

Personally if I was playing a LG Paladin then I would detail my own Oath rather then relying on the DM interpretation.  But do other Players even do backstories now?  The biggest problem always seems to boil down to a disagreement between what the Player is imagining and what the DM is imagining so anything you can do to get on the same page is good.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1133017There's a interesting idea. Usually in fiction "evil" is proactive and "good" is reactive. IE every saturday morning cartoon where the bad guys have a crazy plan and the heroes have to stop them.

What would a neutral campaign versus good look like? It's easy to come up with reasons for them to oppose "evil", but why would they oppose "good", without making the "good guys" (I'm running out of quotation marks) seem "evil".

The first one that I can think of is the King Priest in Dragonlance which essentially looks like what would happen if SJWs got their wish with increasing absurd purity tests and purging of the unclean.

The second one is the backstory to Dark Sun with racial cleansing of the non human races.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1133009Is Evil a choice or innate in your campaign? AKA, can that Red Dragon change its alignment?

In my game, those players just invited a time bomb into their midst. The scorpion will be true to itself.

Yes I think that creatures can change Alignment but not randomly.  It would have to be because of the players actions.  Dragons are intelligent creatures capable of acting to their own benefit.

So maybe it will be a time bomb or maybe not.  I did have a thread Advice: Evil Allies and other Shenanigans regarding it but there was not much response.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1132987Lets talk "Cosmic Factions", which one is neutral? How many are there? Is the neutral one really neutral? I mean it never takes a side on the conflicts of the other factions.

Cosmic Factions IS Good vs Evil, for the religious ones it's God vs the Devil. And since the game tries to use the alignment as a sort of moral code, Order vs Chaos don't work because those aren't intrinsically moral choices as my own detractors have demonstrated. A moral choice IS Good vs Evil whatever the factions on each side are. Order can be good or evil, same for Chaos.

So, unless we're proposing "Cosmic Factions" that are both Good and Evil each and every one of them... Their choices and who do you pledge allegiance to (alignment) are again reduced to the dichotomy of Good vs Evil.

Don't look to me for a full-throated endorsement of d&d alignment. As I said, I grew disenchanted quite a while ago.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1133012But it is a religious issue in the game! The Gods of Order vs the Gods of Chaos!

Only in some settings. Many don't follow that at all.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1133014So it's basically "conveniently" evil. Not "convenient" in the sense that they do what's convenient for them, but in the sense that you can just conveniently slap that label to anything without bothering to define exactly WTF constitutes "neutral" evil in particular, as opposed to other kinds of evil that are too stupid to just conveniently identify as "neutral" evil and still do whatever they want without regard Law or Chaos, like neither of those things matter. Almost like something making the OP's point that the Law/Chaos axis is completely irrelevant and unnecessary.

Good & Evil are irrelevant to the Lawful Neutral Modrons and the Chaotic Neutral Slaadi. It's a nine-alignment system and you're trying to force it into a two-party viewpoint. As I see it, that's a fault of your expectations more than the alignment system.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1133001As a GM, I expect Paladins to be Lawful Good paragons 24/7/365 because YOU - not me, not anybody else, just you - choose to play a Paladin. If I'm running a game with Paladins, they get social advantages beyond other PCs because hot damn, everybody knows you can trust that Paladin. The rest of the adventurers may talk about being good guys, but the Paladin literally glows with divine grace. In exchange for those social bonuses, you must adhere to LG - ESPECIALLY when it sucks to adhere to LG.

So what happens in your game if the Paladin ever encounters a trolley problem?

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1133038So what happens in your game if the Paladin ever encounters a trolley problem?

The trolley problem is usually simple in a fantasy game.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4541[/ATTACH]

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1133019It is irrelevant and unnecessary because from the word go it was shorthand for Good/Evil, IF I remember correctly it even says so in the 0e.

At least based on the Rules Encyclopedia, they say:

QuoteLaw (or Lawful)
Law is the belief that everything should follow an order, and  that obeying rules  is the natural way of life. Lawful creatures will try to tell the truth, obey laws that are fair, keep promises, and care for all living things.

If a choice must be made between the benefit of a group or an individual, a Lawful character will usually choose the group. Sometimes  individual freedoms must be given up for the good of the  group. Lawful characters and  monsters often act in predictable ways. Lawful behavior is usually the same as "good" behavior.

Chaos (or Chaotic)
Chaos is the opposite of Law. It is the belief that life is random  and that chance and luck rule the world. Laws are made to be broken, as long as a person can get away with it. It is not important to keep promises,  and lying and telling the truth are both useful.

To a Chaotic creature, the individual is the most important  of all things. Selfishness is  the normal way of life, and the group is not important. Chaotics  often act on sudden desires and whims. They have strong belief in the power of luck. They cannot always be trusted.  Chaotic behavior is usually the same as behavior that could be  called  "evil."  Each individual  player must decide if his Chaotic character is closer to  a mean, selfish "evil" personality  or merely a happy-golucky, unpredictable personality.

So basically it kind of a mishmash of both.

Quote from: Shasarak;1133025Yes I do think that things like Alignment and Dungeons have been pivotal to DnD success because they give a new player an instant idea of what they are supposed to do when they play.  You are wearing the White Hat and you are going down to kill and loot the Black Hats.  Why?  Because they are Bad and you are Good.  Does Gamma World have that same simplicity for a new player?

I have never met a single new player that wasn't instantly confused by D&D's alignment system, myself included. And I was introduced with Basic D&D, which only had 3 alignment. But those alignments were the crux of the issue, which is to say the Law/Chaos axis--albeit, Basic used a mishmash of both, but still called them the confusing "Lawful, Neutral and Chaotic". Which I did not know WTF that was about, and neither has a single person I've introduced to the game.

The guy introducing me, of course simplified it to Lawful = Good and Chaotic = Evil, which made it easier to understand, but I still didn't like the association between Law and Good. I think I asked if Chaotic could be good, cuz it sounded cooler.

Nobody outside of those who play D&D knows what that is. And the 9 point alignments of AD&D onwards are even more confusing. I seriously doubt alignment has helped D&D any, and you don't need alignment or to explicitly write something in your character sheet to go mindlessly slaughter "bad" guys and take their stuff. People tend to do that by default in every game I've played.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1133036Good & Evil are irrelevant to the Lawful Neutral Modrons and the Chaotic Neutral Slaadi. It's a nine-alignment system and you're trying to force it into a two-party viewpoint. As I see it, that's a fault of your expectations more than the alignment system.

No, I just don't buy the bullshit notion that the Nazis, or any totalitarian group for that matter, can be "neutral". Because "totalitarian", by definition, is about absolutes, which is the opposite of neutrality. And the motivations of the Nazis weren't about promoting evil, but about control, which places their totalitarianism in some place other than the moral Good/Evil axis, even if they can ultimately be considered "evil".

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1132984So the alignment is broken, glad we can agree.

From your perspective. From the other perspectives I described it can work fine. But that's why alignment is so hard to talk about; people try to impose their own morality, instead of stepping back, or accepting an alternative morality.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1133049No, I just don't buy the bullshit notion that the Nazis, or any totalitarian group for that matter, can be "neutral". Because "totalitarian", by definition, is about absolutes, which is the opposite of neutrality. And the motivations of the Nazis weren't about promoting evil, but about control, which places their totalitarianism in some place other than the moral Good/Evil axis, even if they can ultimately be considered "evil".

I gave you the example of the Lawful Neutral Modrons. These guys are all about totalitarian order without care whether that order achieves good or evil. I also mentioned he Slaadi, poster children for Chaotic Neutral. They are about promoting total chaos without concern for good or evil. You may not buy the "bullshit notion" of this, but it's been in D&D for decades.

While we're at it, the Daemons/Yugoloths are Neutral Evil personified. They are no less evil than Demons or Devils, and they pursue their evil ends without any concern for whether it promotes order or chaos (that's just an incidental).

By your description, you make the Nazis sound as though they (as a generalization) are an example of Lawful Neutral intent that became Lawful Evil in practice.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1133049I have never met a single new player that wasn't instantly confused by D&D's alignment system, myself included. And I was introduced with Basic D&D, which only had 3 alignment. But those alignments were the crux of the issue, which is to say the Law/Chaos axis--albeit, Basic used a mishmash of both, but still called them the confusing "Lawful, Neutral and Chaotic". Which I did not know WTF that was about, and neither has a single person I've introduced to the game.

The guy introducing me, of course simplified it to Lawful = Good and Chaotic = Evil, which made it easier to understand, but I still didn't like the association between Law and Good. I think I asked if Chaotic could be good, cuz it sounded cooler.

For a Basic player no you can not have Chaotic being Good because that is too confusing to grasp easily, but if you are an Advanced player then yes certainly you can have a Chaotic Good Character.

QuoteNobody outside of those who play D&D knows what that is. And the 9 point alignments of AD&D onwards are even more confusing. I seriously doubt alignment has helped D&D any, and you don't need alignment or to explicitly write something in your character sheet to go mindlessly slaughter "bad" guys and take their stuff. People tend to do that by default in every game I've played.

If the Players are "doing it be default" then maybe they really are grasping alignment easily.  Maybe you could say intuitively even.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1133001I envy your knack for tossing grenades into discussions!

Do you believe Alignment has been pivotal to D&D's success? If so, please explain.

Personally, I don't know. Do you feel Alignment has helped the success of Warhammer and Palladium's games?

I enjoy alignment as the shorthand for a PC's core values, but I've enjoyed plenty of RPGs without alignment.




All depends on the GM.

As a GM, I expect Paladins to be Lawful Good paragons 24/7/365 because YOU - not me, not anybody else, just you - choose to play a Paladin. If I'm running a game with Paladins, they get social advantages beyond other PCs because hot damn, everybody knows you can trust that Paladin. The rest of the adventurers may talk about being good guys, but the Paladin literally glows with divine grace. In exchange for those social bonuses, you must adhere to LG - ESPECIALLY when it sucks to adhere to LG.




There was an edition of Elric/Stormbringer that had you track your status of Law vs. Chaos. I don't think it added anything to the game. In a Moorcock RPG setting, most people are Unaligned and only those who pledge themselves to certain gods then take on the alignment of their chosen gods.

Greetings!

Doing what is right and good, even when it is uncomfortable or dangerous to do so. Indeed, I am often reminded of the sobering account of how during World War II, in the Pacific fighting against the Japanese Empire, an American submarine had been on patrol, fighting. During one of these engagements, several Japanese Destroyers closed against the American submarine. The U.S. Navy submarine sank several Japanese transport ships, and I think a Destroyer or two as well. Despite the U.S. Navy crew's incredible bravery, skill, and tenacity, they became unexpectedly outnumbered, and were depth charged continuously. The American submarine rose to the surface, and in the desperate night-fighting that ensued, fired all of its last remaining torpedoes, and was fighting with its deck cannon and machine guns. Realizing that the Japanese Destroyers were continuously closing the distance, and escape was impossible, the U.S. Navy Sub Commander ordered his crew into life boats, and to abandon ship. In the dark, they would likely elude the Japanese Destroyers, and be rescued by American forces in the morning. This action occurred in 1944. The U.S. Sub Commander, Commander "Mush" Morton as I recall, had all of his crew safely off the submarine, thanked them and blessed them, and saluted them.

Commander "Mush" Morton then dropped the hatch down, and went down with the ship. The U.S. Navy Commander remained on board his damaged and burning submarine to ensure the destruction of a top-secret Magic Decoding machine on board used to decipher Japanese Naval Codes. The U.S. Navy Commander ensured the destruction of the decoding machine, and died going down with his submarine into the depths of the dark Pacific, also ensuring that the Japanese would not be able to salvage the U.S. submarine, or recover the decoding machine.

Commander "Mush" Morton was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honour, and given the highest praise by his men who had served with him since the beginning of the war, in 1941. The men admired and respected their Commander as a man of faith, honour, discipline, integrity, and absolute loyalty.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, indeed.

The safety and lives of his crew, and the security and victory of America was more important than his own life, which he sacrificed willingly with steely and heroic resolution, and an unwavering commitment to his sacred duty.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1133015Do you agree that Law/Chaos was a shorthand for Good/Evil? I seem to remember it even says so in the 0e..

Absolutely. That's how it was explained in the Red book, even with pictures. I don't have my OD&D nearby so I can't confirm, but I'm pretty sure that Law and Chaos were just Good and Evil until the 9 alignments were created.

The Swords & Wizardy Wiki fully goes Law = Good, Chaos = Evil
https://www.d20swsrd.com/for-players/characters/alignment

There is ZERO reason you can't play OD&D with just Good / Neutral / Evil...or dropping alignment entirely. Heck, even "Detect Evil" is really "Detect Foes". "Protection from Evil" could easily become "Protection from Extraplanar".

And many groups really want to play Heroes vs. Monsters and want that as the default group assumption. That's totally cool and I can appreciate that. I've talked to many players who enjoy my games with moral conundrums as a one shot, but at home campaigns, they really want the comfort of Good vs. Evil as a contrast from the horrid grayness of real life.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1133015By all means, do play as you wish and use whatever works for you and your players.

I shall!

Quote from: Shasarak;1133025Yes I do think that things like Alignment and Dungeons have been pivotal to DnD success because they give a new player an instant idea of what they are supposed to do when they play.  You are wearing the White Hat and you are going down to kill and loot the Black Hats.

Wouldn't that be better served by Good / Neutral / Evil as the alignment choices?

How does the 9 alignment options support that?

Quote from: Shasarak;1133025Does Gamma World have that same simplicity for a new player?

Somewhat. It's all about survival. The default intro is you come from a tribe of mutants and humans which is in trouble. You represent the best of the tribe and need to wander off into the scary world to unearth Ancient goodies to benefit the tribe. Try not to die!

Quote from: Shasarak;1133025Personally if I was playing a LG Paladin then I would detail my own Oath rather then relying on the DM interpretation.

I'm all good for proactive players, but as you know, they're few and far between.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1133038So what happens in your game if the Paladin ever encounters a trolley problem?

They do their best to save the most, then atone for their failure.

I've sent the goblin army at the city, but let the PCs discover a village they thought safe was being targeted by slavers taking advantage of the goblin attack. In that instance, the PCs decided to let the slavers take the village to focus on the city. Their Lawful goddess withheld any cleric spells in punishment until the PCs hunted down the slavers and rescued the villagers. She couldn't care about their moral quandary because she's an inhuman deity of pure Law.

Greetings!

I'm also reminded of another episode that illustrates the "Lawful Good" alignment in a vivid manner. During World War II, again in the Pacific, the campaign on the Island of Guadalcanal was being fought by the United States Marines against the forces of the Japanese Empire. The Marines were barely holding on. If the Japanese Navy could reach the island with several powerful convoys full of supplies, weapons, and reinforcement troops, the U.S. Marines would be slaughtered to the last man, and the Japanese would conquer Guadalcanal, which would place them in a commanding position against America and Australia, throughout the region. Guadalcanal was a naval and amphibious turning point in the South Pacific. The Battles of the Coral Sea, Midway, and Guadalcanal were the turning points in the Pacific War. A subset of the Guadalcanal campaign, was the Battle of the Solomon Islands, a naval battle which was connected to our victory in Guadalcanal. The naval battle was *THE* battle to stop the Japanese convoys to Guadalcanal.

The U.S. Navy was outnumbered, and arguably the Japanese Navy were more experienced and more skilled. There were no aircraft carriers primarily involved in the battle, which endured for like a week straight. Each force had several battleships, heavy and light cruisers, and destroyers. What ensued was a naval hand-to-hand gun battle that occasionally came face-to-face, a hundred yards separating enemy war ships. Torpedoes swimming at close range, naval guns, even small deck guns, blazing away at point blank range, day and night, non-stop. Oil and fire everywhere in the roiling seas about. Ships burning, and being blown apart. Men bleeding, screaming and dying in the dozens and hundreds, every day, and every night. None of the Japanese ships retreated, as they pressed the attack. They knew, too, that the campaign on Guadalcanal depended on them getting through, no matter the cost. Likewise, the U.S. Navy threw everything we could scrape up in the region, to save the U.S. Marines on Guadalcanal.

Thousands of American sailors of the United States Navy died during that battle, from young seamen, to Admirals and Captains, fighting with pistols in hand. Several of them died in the battle as well. All sacrificed, and bled in a terrible slaughter.

When the smoke finally cleared, and the battle was over. The Japanese retreated with their few remnants left. The U.S. Navy had stood in the breech, had stood in the fire, and won. Their selfless and heroic sacrifice, to a man, saved the Marines on Guadalcanal, and helped to turn the tide against the Japanese Empire. Such a victory was going to be costly, and bloody, and everyone knew this before the first shells were fired. No one retreated, and no one wanted to give up, even though the fighting would cost them their lives. They knew they were going to die, in the thousands. It was a savage and bloody battle, that America won. The U.S. Navy sacrificed thousands of their brave and noble sailors so that we would have a chance at victory. Every man knew the hour of their reckoning had come.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK